As a Buddhist, or even if you are not a Buddhist, what do you think of http://www.liberationunleashed.com?Do you think the level of "no-self" or "not-self" realization is same as or similar to that of a sotapanna?Even if it's not of the same level, what's wrong with having not-self realization with their approach?Personally, I have no objection if that helps for such a realization.

Sameer

Last edited by SamKR on Fri Oct 05, 2012 2:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Thanks, Ben for the reply.Me too, I am also not going to try that, and will stick to Buddhadhamma. But I was thinking about other people; if they try just that approach and have "not-self" realization is there anything wrong? Isn't it better than no realization?

This isn't particularly new. I am yet to be convinced that proponents of these groups produce a real attainment.Some of my less edifying observations include witnessing an argument between a self-professed arahant and a self-professed sotapanna. And the disciples of one extremely obnoxious but charismatic 'enlightened' teacher to go forth and promote to the point of spamming each and every online forum they could find - in a bid to generate sales for that person's book.Maybe some people will find this stuff useful and then move on to something a bit more authentic. kind regards,

Ben

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

The guy in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... B6oPN3Bz_Y seems to me to know what he is talking about. The thing is, how good a teacher is he? How would the LU teachers deal with an emergency? With a teacher in an established tradition its likely that the teacher has been vetted by his superiors and that the tradition has methods for dealing with emergencies or difficulties that students might encounter. Someone who has difficulties with dogma or established religion might benefit from this, but it seems to me that seeing anatta without a proper support system could be very problematic for some. I hope the folks at LU know what they are doing

Last edited by m0rl0ck on Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

"When you meditate, don't send your mind outside. Don't fasten onto any knowledge at all. Whatever knowledge you've gained from books or teachers, don't bring it in to complicate things. Cut away all preoccupations, and then as you meditate let all your knowledge come from what's going on in the mind. When the mind is quiet, you'll know it for yourself. But you have to keep meditating a lot. When the time comes for things to develop, they'll develop on their own. Whatever you know, have it come from your own mind.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... eleft.html

I apologize for the triplets. Its actually an artifact of my current connection.kind regards,

Ben

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Dan74 wrote:Firstly, I think it could only work if you are already on the brink of realizing no self.

Good point; this could be true.

Ben wrote: And the disciples of one extremely obnoxious but charismatic 'enlightened' teacher to go forth and promote to the point of spamming each and every online forum they could find - in a bid to generate sales for that person's book.

Yes, I am aware of that.

Ben wrote:Maybe some people will find this stuff useful and then move on to something a bit more authentic.

Yes, that's my main point, though I did not mention in my original post. Not only "liberation unleashed", but there are many spiritual and also new agey groups and teachers whose teachings are partially close to Buddha Dhamma. Another good example is Eckhart Tolle. People following their teachings could gain some insight, and may later get attracted to more profound teachings of the Buddha.

m0rl0ck wrote:The guy in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... B6oPN3Bz_Y seems to me to know what he is talking about. The thing is, how good a teacher is he? How would the LU teachers deal with an emergency? With a teacher in an established tradition its likely that the teacher has been vetted by his superiors and that the tradition has methods for dealing with emergencies or difficulties that students might encounter. Someone who has difficulties with dogma or established religion might benefit from this, but it seems to me that seeing anatta without a proper support system could be very problematic for some. I hope the folks at LU know what they are doing

Another good point. I fully agree. They even have the following disclaimer:

The method of inquiry used on this site may actually work, unlike many spiritual practices. It may change how you regard your self, your relationships and your world. Neither you nor we can predict how this will turn out for you. If you are already fragile, it may exacerbate any mental condition or disorder, or it may not. If you have issues in your relationship, it may improve it, or not. If you have strong religious or spiritual beliefs, direct experience may support them, or (in our experience) not.You are responsible for your honesty, integrity and focus. We advise that you be willing to take the risk and accept that a leap into the unknown is just that.

I went through the LU direct pointing process a few months ago.... My meditation practice has been inquiring into Anatta for some time ("who" is looking ha ha!) and I came across the Facebook forum so I joined. It was a useful exercise loosely based on the Soto Zen approach where the "seeker" is asked many questions, leading to seeing the illusion of self. Once through the process (it can take days,or months, some give up although from my observations it took most people a matter of days) you are invited to join the "aftercare" forums where you can discuss your experiences, help with residual feelings of self, adjust and share to a new way of being. Some forums directly invite users to post teachings from Gurus, Monks etc, some are purely discussion only. It was interesting to read for a while but quite a lot of arguing goes on in these forums and they can get quite personal between some of the users. There are dominant users who once come into the forums tend to take over the thread.

Lots of people seemed to get a lot of help there which is good but for me.... not so helpful after a while. I work with the five precepts and the noble eightfold path in my everyday life. I am no where near perfect. But this person, Sophia, is so blessed that in this lifetime, I have encountered the Dhamma and to just unveil the illusion of self is only one more step in the journey. I asked within the forums a few times about the role of humility, compassion, benevolence and helping others "post gate" as they call it and was met all round with "that's just ego, decisions happen on their own, there is no "you" to be responsible (or accountable, for that matter) and life looks after itself". I found this a little disconcerting so after a while I left.

So all in all, take what you want from these places. There seem to be quite a few members who are very dedicated, and do some great work. There are lots who are very opinionated which was confusing as whose opinion is it anyway It is just for seeing the illusion of self and then after that.... it is up to the "you" that is not there

Most people in my country, same as yours, have never heard of such a concept as non-self. If it leads to the possibility of someone thinking, wow this is going nowhere, and then researching the profundity of the broader teachings, it must be a good thing. If it sounds fruity or new-agey, then at least it's a path to have a chance at seeing things as they are. When I was growing up in the Christian tradition, none of this was even acceptable to hear because people crush you for deviating from doctorine. What, you are not God's own special creation!!!!? unthinkable. It undermines the ego of everyone. If you are not self, then it means that they too are not self, not special or eternal, and no one likes to hear that. So the more paths to the knowledge, the better.

Hello,I was told about LIBERATION UNLEASHED by a good friend,anyhow I was a bit apprehensive to enter the gate but my fear disappeared when I realised many of the people guiding have 20-30 years experience of Buddhism and meditation.Once the separate self has been seen as an illusion there is only oneness there has only ever been oneness,all is arising in awareness thoughts, tastes sounds,smells,sights,emotions,,feelings,but its ownerless.

"The Oneness of all being is sometimes taught as a basic Buddhist principle, but this discourse shows that the Buddha himself rejected the idea. It is simply one of the extremes that he avoided by teaching dependent co-arising."

Question: This word 'citta' is used in the suttas for the subjective consciousness. If there's a citta from which the asavas (biases) are removed and a citta which is liberated, how does this fit in with the idea of self or no-self? How does one avoid self-view in thinking about the citta? If there's no self, who is it that's aware and what is it that becomes enlightened?

Answer: This is where Buddhism excels. It totally frustrates that desire. The Buddha wouldn't give an inch on that, because that's the non-dualism of the Buddha's teaching. It's psychologically uninspiring. You're left with just letting go of things rather than holding on to the feeling of a God or Oneness or the Soul or the Subject with capital S, or the Overself, or the Atman or Brahman or whatever - because those are all perceptions and the Buddha was pointing to the grasping of perception.

The "I am" is a perception - isn't it? - and "God" is a perception. They're conventionally valid for communication and so forth, but as a practice, if you don't let go of perception then you tend to still have the illusion - an illusoriness coming from a belief in the perception of the overself, or God or the Oneness or Buddha Nature, or the divine substance or the divine essence, or something like that.

Like with monism - monistic thinking is very inspiring. "We're all one. We are one - that's our true nature - the one mind." And you can talk of the universal mind and the wholeness and the oneness of everything. That's very uplifting, that's the inspiration. But non-dualism doesn't inspire. It's deliberately psychologically non-inspiring because you're letting go of the desire for inspiration, of that desire and need and clutching at inspiring concepts.

I think some people obsess about not-self stuff. It's also easy to get into some stupid ideas if you take the not-self too far. Follow the Buddha's teaching and I think the attachment to self will gradually fade away in a naturally and healthy way.

Anatta is often presented in the suttas as following impermanence and suffering.

"Rāhula, what do you think? Is the eye permanent or impermanent?"—"Impermanent, venerable sir."—"Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?"—"Suffering, venerable sir."—"Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?"—"No, venerable sir." "Rāhula, what do you think? Are forms … Is eye-consciousness … [279] … Is eye-contact … Is anything comprised within the feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness that arise with eye-contact as condition permanent or impermanent?"—"Impermanent, venerable sir."—"Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?"—"Suffering, venerable sir."—"Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?"—"No, venerable sir."